Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
23 July 2007
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
Merz Pharma GmbH & Co KGaA
Intersante Gmbh
Section 5(2)(b)


Section 5(2)(b): Opposition successful

Points Of Interest

  • In its evidence the opponent referred to the fact that it had successfully opposed this applicant in France and Switzerland but the Hearing Officer was not influenced by such decisions. (Paragraph 31 refers).


The opponent owns the registered mark SALFIRA in respect of goods in Classes 3 and 10 and in respect of a range of goods in Class 5 which are identical and similar to the goods of the applicant. The opponent also filed evidence of use of its mark but this use related to goods in Class 3 and was not substantiated to any extent. Such use did not, therefore, impact on the Hearing Officer’s decision.

As identical goods are at issue in these proceedings the only matter for consideration by the Hearing Officer was a comparison of the respective marks SAKIRA and SALFIRA. The Hearing Officer noted that the respective marks have the letters SA IRA in common and that both are of similar length. There is thus some visual similarity. In looking at the construction and rhythm of the two words the Hearing Officer considered them to be phonetically similar. Also both marks are invented words with no conceptual meaning or allusive reference to the goods. The Hearing Officer went on to conclude that is a likelihood of confusion of the public if the respective marks are used on identical goods and that the opponent succeeded in its opposition under Section 5(2)(b).

Full decision O/206/07 PDF document31Kb